logo
UK passes updated data bill, without AI copyright provisions

UK passes updated data bill, without AI copyright provisions

Coin Geek9 hours ago

Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
After intensive debates, the United Kingdom parliament has finally passed the 'Data (Use and Access) Bill' (DUA Act), intended to simplify the use of and access to personal data for U.K. data regulators whilst easing the administrative burden of using personal data.
The DUA Act builds on the Data Protection Act 2018 and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)—the landmark European Union regulation on information privacy and data use—to modernize the U.K.'s data regime and facilitate more streamlined compliance processes without eroding the protections of the GDPR legislation.
On June 11, the bill passed from the House of Lords to the Royal Assent stage—the final stage of the legislative process in the U.K., in which the King essentially rubber stamps bills that Parliament has approved.
When it does get its Royal approval—at a date to be decided soon—the DUA Act will become law and herald in the most significant change to the U.K.'s data protection framework since GDPR.
Key updates in the bill include expanding the scope for data processing under 'Legitimate Interests,' such as for direct marketing and security processing, reducing interruptive and ineffective cookie consent banners, and provisions to boost market research, product development, and technological innovation.
The structure and remit of the U.K.'s information rights regulator, the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO), will also be 'modernized,' requiring it to consider the public interest in promoting innovation and competition alongside privacy and data protection.
Another change involves streamlining the process of submitting a 'Data Subject Access Request' to make it more efficient for individuals and organizations to request information on how a company uses or stores its data.
However, one key change the bill doesn't include is a much-debated amendment to force big tech firms and artificial intelligence (AI) companies to get permission and/or pay for U.K. content, as the government insisted that it was planning to address this topic in future AI and copyright legislation—after the conclusion of a consultation on the topic in February.
The DPO Centre, a leading U.K. data protection officer and resource center, described the DUA Act as 'a targeted evolution of the current regime' rather than a complete departure from existing frameworks.
The rocky road to Royal Assent
The DUA Act's passage to Royal Assent was a long, bumpy road that started under the previous Conservative government with the Data Protection and Digital Access (DPDI) Bill, first introduced in 2022.
The DPDI set out a range of provisions for how data can be accessed, used, and processed, including making it easier and clearer for organizations to use and re-use data for research purposes; clarifying the processes and safeguards for the re-use of personal data; and easing compliance burdens on organizations related to record keeping, breach reporting and responding to unreasonable information requests from individuals. However, the DPDI failed to pass before the 2024 general election, and in October 2024, the new Labour government introduced the revised DUA Act.
The Labour bill retained much of the original content while removing some of the more controversial provisions of the DPDI, including one that would have allowed government oversight of the ICO's strategic priorities and another that required telecom providers to report suspected illegal marketing to the ICO.
On May 12, the House of Lords—the Upper chamber of U.K. Parliament—voted by a 147 majority to amend the DUA Act, adding transparency requirements to ensure U.K. copyright holders have to give permission for their work to be used.
The amendment would have forced tech companies to declare their use of copyright material when training AI tools so that they could not access U.K. content without paying for it—a proposal backed by prominent U.K. recording artists such as Elton John and Dua Lipa.
However, a couple of days later, the House of Common—the lower (and elected) chamber of Parliament primarily responsible for producing legislation—rejected this change, with the government reasoning that it was already carrying out a separate consultation on AI and copyright and wanted to wait on the outcome.
In an interview with BBC journalist Laura Kuenssberg, Elton John described the Commons' rejection of the amendment as 'criminal,' adding that if ministers went ahead with plans to allow AI firms to use artists' content without paying, they would be 'committing theft, thievery on a high scale.'
The Commons' decision also resulted in an extended back and forth, known as a 'ping-pong,' between the two houses of Parliament, as amendments were debated, changed, and rejected, with the legislation bouncing from one chamber to another in the process.
Ultimately, a compromise was struck, with the Commons rejecting the Lords' amendment on AI, but the government agreed to publish reports on its AI and copyright proposals within nine months of Royal Assent.
Ben Seretny, Head of DPOs at The DPO Centre, says, 'The final version of the DUA Bill feels more like a careful update than a radical overhaul of the UK GDPR and Privacy and Electronic Communications Regulations (PECR) frameworks.'
Commenting on June 12 on the bill's passage from Parliament, Seretny warned that 'while some areas are now clearer, others may introduce uncertainty.'
In particular, he noted that the DUA Act gives the Secretary of State more power to decide which countries have data protection standards that are not 'materially lower' than the U.K.—a shift in language that he suggested may concern the European Commission, which is due to review the U.K.'s data adequacy status in December.
In order for artificial intelligence (AI) to work right within the law and thrive in the face of growing challenges, it needs to integrate an enterprise blockchain system that ensures data input quality and ownership—allowing it to keep data safe while also guaranteeing the immutability of data. Check out CoinGeek's coverage on this emerging tech to learn more why Enterprise blockchain will be the backbone of AI .
Watch: Blockchain & AI unlock possibilities
title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen="">

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote
Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote

Leader Live

timean hour ago

  • Leader Live

Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote

Kim Leadbeater is expected to re-state her argument that dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives, but opponents of her Bill have warned it fails to guarantee protections for society's most vulnerable. Friday will be the first time the Bill has been debated and voted on in its entirety since last year's historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines. The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill's passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting. An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his 'position is long-standing and well-known' on assisted dying. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. While supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date, opponents claim the process has been rushed and that changes to the Bill mean it is now weaker than it was when first introduced. Significant changes since it succeeded in the initial vote in Parliament include the replacement of the High Court safeguard with expert panels, and a doubling of the implementation period to a maximum of four years for an assisted dying service to be in place should the Bill pass into law. Academic and disability campaigner Miro Griffiths has sent an open letter to MPs, asking them not to endorse the 'perilous piece of legislation' even if they support assisted dying in principle. He wrote: 'I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.' Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who would have a vote should the Bill make its way to the House of Lords, said: 'We are constantly being told that this Bill is not for disabled people and there will not be coercion. 'Coercion is an absolute reality in today's society, and in every jurisdiction where assisted dying has been brought in, it has expanded either through legislation, the court system or practice. 'It is very easy to see that this route will be suggested to disabled people who will be made to feel a burden.' The Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) stated last month that it has 'serious concerns' about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the Bill in its current form. Ahead of Friday's vote, Dr Annabel Price from the college said that as it stands the involvement of psychiatrists in expert panels is 'deeply troubling' as they would not have 'enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments' and warned of the 'risk (of) making irreversible decisions based on treatable suffering'. Countering this, a number of psychiatrists recently expressed their support for the assisted dying Bill, voicing concern and distancing themselves from the opposition stance taken by their professional medical body. Seven RCPsych members, including a former college president and vice-president, wrote to MPs to voice their backing for the Bill, describing it as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework' they argue is 'far preferable to the unjust status quo, where we know dying people seek to exercise choice at the end of life, but without any upfront safeguards, routine oversight or support from relevant clinicians'. Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter Rebecca Wilcox said she is 'really hopeful' the Bill can pass the major vote, as she warned against 'scaremongering' by opponents.

Assisted dying: All you need to know ahead of the next crunch parliamentary vote
Assisted dying: All you need to know ahead of the next crunch parliamentary vote

Leader Live

timean hour ago

  • Leader Live

Assisted dying: All you need to know ahead of the next crunch parliamentary vote

Here, the PA news agency takes a look at the Bill and what is happening. – What is in the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill? The proposed legislation would allow terminally ill adults in England and Wales, with fewer than six months to live, to apply for an assisted death. This would be subject to approval by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior legal figure and psychiatrist. The terminally ill person would take an approved substance, provided by a doctor but administered only by the person themselves. – When would assisted dying be available if the Bill became law? The implementation period has been doubled to a maximum of four years from royal assent, rather than the initially suggested two years. If the Bill was to pass later this year that would mean it might not be until 2029, potentially coinciding with the end of this Government's parliament, that assisted dying was being offered. Labour MP Kim Leadbeater, who is the parliamentarian behind the Bill and put forward the extended timeframe, has insisted it is 'a backstop' rather than a target, as she pledged to 'hold the Government's feet to the fire' on implementing legislation should the Bill pass. The extended implementation period was one of a number of changes made since the Bill was first introduced to the Commons back in October. – What other changes have there been? The High Court safeguard has been dropped and replaced by expert panels – a change much-criticised by opponents who said it weakened the Bill, but something Ms Leadbeater has argued strengthens it. At the end of a weeks-long committee process earlier this year to amend the Bill, Ms Leadbeater said rather than removing judges from the process, 'we are adding the expertise and experience of psychiatrists and social workers to provide extra protections in the areas of assessing mental capacity and detecting coercion while retaining judicial oversight'. Changes were also made to ensure the establishment of independent advocates to support people with learning disabilities, autism or mental health conditions and to set up a disability advisory board to advise on legal implementation and impact on disabled people. Amendments added earlier this month during report stage in the Commons will also see assisted dying adverts banned if the Bill becomes law, and a prohibition on medics being able to speak with under-18s about assisted dying. – Do we know much more about the potential impact of such a service coming in? A Government impact assessment, published earlier this month, estimated that between 164 and 647 assisted deaths could potentially take place in the first year of the service, rising to between 1,042 and 4,559 in year 10. The establishment of a Voluntary Assisted Dying Commissioner and three-member expert panels would cost an estimated average of between £10.9 million to £13.6 million per year, the document said. It had 'not been possible' to estimate the overall implementation costs at this stage of the process, it added. While noting that cutting end-of-life care costs 'is not stated as an objective of the policy', the assessment estimated that such costs could be reduced by as much as an estimated £10 million in the first year and almost £60 million after 10 years. – Do healthcare staff have to take part in assisted dying? It was already the case that doctors would not have to take part, but MPs have since voted to insert a new clause into the Bill extending that to anyone. The wording means 'no person', including social care workers and pharmacists, is obliged to take part in assisted dying and can now opt out. Amendments to the Bill were debated on care homes and hospices also being able to opt out but these were not voted on. Ms Leadbeater has previously said there is nothing in the Bill to say they have to, nor is there anything to say they do not have to, adding on the Parliament Matters podcast that this is 'the best position to be in' and that nobody should be 'dictating to hospices what they do and don't do around assisted dying'. – What will happen on Friday? The Bill is back for third reading, which is the first time MPs will vote on the overall piece of legislation since the yes vote in November. It is expected some outstanding amendments might be voted on first thing on Friday before debate on the Bill as a whole begins. MPs voted 330 to 275, majority 55, to approve the Bill at second reading in November. The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill's passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting. An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained. A vote would be expected to take place mid-afternoon. – What about assisted dying in the rest of the UK and Crown Dependencies? The Isle of Man looks likely to become the first part of the British Isles to legalise assisted dying, after its proposed legislation passed through a final vote of the parliament's upper chamber in March. In what was hailed a 'landmark moment', members of the Scottish Parliament (MSPs) in May voted in favour of the Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill, backing its general principles. It will now go forward for further scrutiny and amendments but will only become law if MSPs approve it in a final vote, which should take place later this year. Any move to legalise assisted dying in Northern Ireland would have to be passed by politicians in the devolved Assembly at Stormont. Jersey's parliament is expected to debate a draft law for an assisted dying service on the island for terminally ill people later this year. With a likely 18-month implementation period if a law is approved, the earliest it could come into effect would be summer 2027.

Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote
Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote

Glasgow Times

timean hour ago

  • Glasgow Times

Campaigners make case for assisted dying Bill ahead of crucial Commons vote

Kim Leadbeater is expected to re-state her argument that dying people must be given choice at the end of their lives, but opponents of her Bill have warned it fails to guarantee protections for society's most vulnerable. Friday will be the first time the Bill has been debated and voted on in its entirety since last year's historic yes vote, when MPs supported the principle of assisted dying for England and Wales by a majority of 55. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill, meaning they decide according to their conscience rather than along party lines. MPs are entitled to have a free vote on the Bill (Stefan Rousseau/PA) The relatively narrow majority means every vote will count on Friday, to secure the Bill's passage to the House of Lords for further debate and voting. An an example, the Bill would fall if 28 MPs switched directly from voting yes to no, but only if all other MPs voted exactly the same way as they did in November, including those who abstained. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill, as he did last year, saying earlier this week that his 'position is long-standing and well-known' on assisted dying. Health Secretary Wes Streeting, while describing Ms Leadbeater's work on the proposed legislation as 'extremely helpful', confirmed in April that he still intended to vote against it. While supporters of the Bill say it is coming back to the Commons with better safeguards after more than 90 hours of parliamentary time spent on it to date, opponents claim the process has been rushed and that changes to the Bill mean it is now weaker than it was when first introduced. Significant changes since it succeeded in the initial vote in Parliament include the replacement of the High Court safeguard with expert panels, and a doubling of the implementation period to a maximum of four years for an assisted dying service to be in place should the Bill pass into law. Academic and disability campaigner Miro Griffiths has sent an open letter to MPs, asking them not to endorse the 'perilous piece of legislation' even if they support assisted dying in principle. He wrote: 'I would ask you to devote your energy to improving ethical and progressive forms of support: blanket suicide prevention, palliative care, and measures that create a more just and inclusive society for disabled people. This is the better way forward.' Baroness Tanni Grey-Thompson, who would have a vote should the Bill make its way to the House of Lords, said: 'We are constantly being told that this Bill is not for disabled people and there will not be coercion. 'Coercion is an absolute reality in today's society, and in every jurisdiction where assisted dying has been brought in, it has expanded either through legislation, the court system or practice. 'It is very easy to see that this route will be suggested to disabled people who will be made to feel a burden.' The Royal College of Psychiatrists (RCPsych) stated last month that it has 'serious concerns' about the safeguarding of people with mental illness and said it cannot support the Bill in its current form. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has indicated he will continue to back the Bill (Suzanne Plunkett/PA) Ahead of Friday's vote, Dr Annabel Price from the college said that as it stands the involvement of psychiatrists in expert panels is 'deeply troubling' as they would not have 'enough space or time to carry out proper, holistic assessments' and warned of the 'risk (of) making irreversible decisions based on treatable suffering'. Countering this, a number of psychiatrists recently expressed their support for the assisted dying Bill, voicing concern and distancing themselves from the opposition stance taken by their professional medical body. Seven RCPsych members, including a former college president and vice-president, wrote to MPs to voice their backing for the Bill, describing it as 'workable, safe and compassionate' with a 'clear and transparent legal framework' they argue is 'far preferable to the unjust status quo, where we know dying people seek to exercise choice at the end of life, but without any upfront safeguards, routine oversight or support from relevant clinicians'. Meanwhile, Dame Esther Rantzen's daughter Rebecca Wilcox said she is 'really hopeful' the Bill can pass the major vote, as she warned against 'scaremongering' by opponents.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store